(07-06-2017 08:18 PM)otown Wrote:  

(07-06-2017 06:51 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(07-06-2017 06:44 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  One thing Im noticing is that some schools apparently count capital spending in their annual budgets and some do not. That potentially creates some massive problems when comparing budgets. Just as an example, Houston currently has about 80 million in capital athletics projects underway. Of that amount, about 50 million of it is funded by private donations. If these expenditures were included, Houston numbers would reflect a budget of over 100 million and it would probably sit at the top of your list of budgets minus student fees and transfers. Not only that, but the capital expenditures for UH since 2013 is well over a quarter of a billion--more than half of which is all private donations. So it would have affected almost every year since 2013.

I don't know how USA Today accounts for capital projects. I guess they don't include them either, otherwise Houston would be way above the $51 million in overall revenue they list them at. I guess in their way of reckoning, such things don't count.

As a USF fan, this list is really sobering to me. Schools like Hawaii and Arkansas State are generating a lot more athletic dollars than we are. That is pretty sad.

Does this have anything to do with the lack of an OCS?

It almost surely does. Without an OCS, USF has limited control over revenue streams. E.g., here in Baton Rouge, if LSU wants to boost stadium revenue, they tack on another 3,000 club seats. USF can't do that. We can't make changes to the Bucs stadium, and we don't get to keep all the revenue generated.

It's not a good long-term situation.